Gary Johnson now polling at 6% nationally, and is suing the two parties for debate access.
"If the lawsuit is successful, this year's CPD-sponsored debates will either expand to include the Libertarian candidates as well as the Green Party ticket of Massachusetts physician Jill Stein and Pennsylvania anti-poverty advocate Cheri Honkala, or be canceled."
While I disagree that property (a loaded word) is the root of all evil, I do think it's time the real libertarians separate themselves from the fakes.
Business value via Ayn Rand Objectivism is isolationist in nature and severely underestimates the value of those around you. The right to self-interest must inherently, simultaneously and logically accept the right to self-interest of others. This is a simple but apparently true error in a large part of the co-opted liberty movement. Liberty means freedom not for me, or you, or the individual alone but for everyone at once. Self-interest is not a license to abandon the interests of others. It is in fact a requirement to ensure the possibility of all self-interest at once. You cannot have a market by yourself. And the wealth of the market stems from the success of everyone around you, not from you alone.
Here's the problem as I see it: there is a false dichotomy being played out. Elizabeth Warren is neither wrong or right. Government can be great and it can also suck. Privatization can be great and it can also suck. There is a spectrum of good and bad and mediocre examples of all of these. There are simply many different ways for a society to succeed.
My objection is when members of a society have no choice about which solution they would like to participate in. I don't like the false dichotomy because it perpetuates the notion that there must only be one social contract for everybody.
I don't think Ron Paul necessarily "wins" this argument. The post 9/11 world is a place where there are a lot of people who are OK with the Patriot Act and proactive security measures. It just comes down to whether you think they will work or not, because they certainly erode our individual liberty. Are you OK with that tradeoff?
For me, if someone is crazy and wants to hijack a plane, there's actually nothing you can do about it. You can carry sharp sticks onto planes that function as knives. And you can get complex bomb devices and other fear capturing devices onto planes relatively easy.
But the flip side is having someone listen to your phone calls and pepper spray you when you protest. One person has the right to use force over or spy on another without due process. Who is the actual terrorist here? And why should anyone trust a bureaucrat to keep them safe?
One of the problems in politics today (maybe all time?) is that people immediately knee-jerk one direction or another. But the concepts that Elizabeth Warren promotes are much more rooted in philosophy than typical political jargon. She's making a structured case for her political position.
This is a good thing: instead of talking about symptoms she's bringing the conversation over to the root systems. We're all better off talking about root causes and rooted decision making.
The problem with figurehead leaders like Romney, Obama, Bush and Pelosi is that they don't have any underlying principle that they are attempting to accomplish, it's just vague party talking points. There is no foundation. With principled leaders you not only know what you are getting but why you are getting it. And on this foundation we can truly evaluate what works and stop what doesn't work instead of arguing endlessly through spin and biased media jargon.
I don't agree at all with Warren's ideas, but in a democratic situation (which we are all stuck in currently) I'd much rather engage with someone who has thought through their position than a puppet.
As always, I'm interested in the dynamics of social thought. If all you want to do is call Warren a bitch I'm not interested.
Absolute nightmarish scenario watching him proudly discard due process while the crowd nervously twists up and down, unsure what exactly is going on. The confusion is palpable, especially when he violates the right-left rhetoric only long enough to agree with Obama when it comes to shredding the constitution.
"I think this is a very hard choice, but the price - we think the price is worth it." - Madeleine Albright, 1996.
What was worth it? We eventually just invaded Iraq so what was worth it? What are we doing now with Iran? What's different this time around? Why are we punishing ordinary people in Iran with economic sanctions when we know it's not worth it?
RESHARE: One of the definite values of Google Plus is how many photographers/artists are on here, adding so much beauty and perspective to the stream. Here are some good photographers I like following. What photographers do you follow?
Reshared text: Its to dark for pictures but the east and west side of the block is covered with cops caring zip handcuffs and portable fencing. They are about to flank the protesters and start arresting!
"The federal standards will pre-empt state rules in at least one respect: the national health plans will automatically be eligible to compete against other private insurers in the new exchanges, regardless of whether they have been certified as meeting the standards of those exchanges."
Why is this the first I am hearing of this? Did legislators just sneak the Public Option through the back door somehow?
At what point does free speech become provocation - like the shouting "fire" in the theater example. Free speech is important, but it's not like it's a simple guideline. Youtube has to weigh many options, and they are a private enterprise. As far as I can tell they have acted independently so far.
(1) Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd; (2) Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow; (3) Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to board their cow at the farm of a farmer; (4) The Zinniker Plaintiffs’ private contract does not fall outside the scope of the States’ police power; (5) Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice; (6) DATCP [Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection] . . . had jurisdiction to regulate the Zinniker Plaintiffs’ conduct.
If Google+ were as important to modern life as gmail, then I could see the point. But if these guys don't post on FB or anywhere else the point made here is completely invalid. G+ isn't something that everyone needs or even wants to use.
"Arguing the case for the Obama administration, Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. defended the law as a constitutional exercise of congressional power under the charter’s commerce clause to regulate interstate commerce."
Take a second to notice how this works. Try to ignore the points both the Young Turks and Lou Dobbs make and rather focus on the larger, more general effect of what is happening here.
1. It immediately sets up a false dichotomy of liberal vs conservative. Everybody will fall into line either agreeing disagreeing because the opinion is so heavy-handed and absolute. There is no room for a third opinion or nuance when complex concepts are reduced like this. You've just been boxed up into one of two camps whether you wanted to be or not. 2. The vilification placed upon the topic creates an atmosphere of hatred and despair (large, sweeping agendas that out of our control). This is responded to with ridicule and return vilification. The dialogue is never about anything real but rather more focused on loaded meta concepts (liberal Hollywood, agendas and indoctrination, and also massive outrage). 3. The outrage is a poor response, this is exactly the desired effect of this kind of "story". A strongly divided and angry group of people cannot be rational and effective as a collective society. This is a validation of the false dichotomy and perpetuates the myth of a black and white world.
I don't know if "it's your fault" is the right way to phrase it, but to me this is the right take on the Google's privacy problem this week.
Google is not a stalker or Peeping Tom. When you "plus one" something you are giving them data about what you like, which they then can use to improve the services they provide you. This isn't about privacy at all. It's about information. If you want ads all over the internet that have nothing to do with you and no integrated services than you can shut off your cookies. Your subsequent internet experience will be terrible.
Why would "first responders" ever even need to commandeer private routers? Are "first responders" that technologically bereft that they cannot function without private routers? Wouldn't it make much more sense for them to have a reliable, tested, and durable network of their own?
These two sides will argue this classic discussion until they are blue in the face and neither will get what they want because there is only one state. That means that at any given time, only a single implementation will be forced upon everyone. And that single implementation is neither capitalist or socialist, it's some kind of disgusting authoritarian corporate state that nobody wants.
Reshared text: Update: photos from the SD card that provide clues are in the album
For Sale: Canon EOS 1000D Description: only used underwater once, in the Pacific Ocean, for approximately one year.
Actual story: found off the end of a wharf in Deep Bay, BC while I was diving on a job for the harbour. I removed the SD card, cleaned it up, stuck it in a card reader and after being underwater in a corroding camera since August 2010 - it works! Approximately 50 pictures on the card from a family vacation. If you know a fire fighter from British Columbia that won the Pacific Regional Firefit competition in 2010, has a lovely wife and (now) 2 year old daughter - let me know. I would love to get them their vacation photos :)
There are other clues on within the pictures - I think I should be able to track them down (not sure he'll want the camera back tho).
"Former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams and players maintained a bounty pool of as much as $50,000 over the last three seasons to award New Orleans players for delivering game-ending injuries to the opposition, paying bonuses of $1,000 for so-called “cart-offs” and $1,500 for knockouts. The rewards were doubled or tripled during the playoffs, and quarterbacks Brett Favre and Kurt Warner were among the targets."
I agree with +Stefan Molyneux. But the problem for me (and I think some of the OWS protesters) is that while it may originate with the state, I don't think it's just the state any more. We're not talking about Starbucks here, we're talking about Goldman Sachs, Lockheed Martin, Exxon and Wal-Mart. These companies and others like them literally write legislation. The difference is becoming blurred.
Yes, the state enables them to do this, but at some point the balance of power shifts from the kings to the kingmakers. Not sure if we are there yet, but it's worth considering.
Here's a cool idea for the plot of a hip, action-thriller movie set in some alternate dystopian universe: a country is spying on itself by secretly harnessing ancient security technology BUT it doesn't want the public to know, so it is using hackers to send DDOS attacks against whistleblowing websites. Everyone says "that sucks" and then goes and watches the Olympics.
Certain smaller stature cohabitants knocked over my laptop and damaged the hard drive over the weekend. I would like to take this moment to remind everyone to back up your stuff if you have smaller stature cohabitants.
Look how gleefully the right gobbles up Wikileaks when it benefits them. They treat it as a serious source of information. What happened to all the disgust and rejection that accompanied the previous large release of cables?
EDIT: to be clear, I personally like the concept of Wikileaks - transparency is a good thing.
Chase Bank just set me a snail mail informing me that their records indicate I don't want any offers from them. It also informs me they are "updating [my] preferences" to state that I DO want offers from them, unless I fill out a form saying I don't. #fuckthesebanks
Reshared text: How to update your Facebook status from Google+ without an extension:
1. Access Facebook. 2. Go to http://facebook.com/mobile 3. Copy your email address unique. 4. Go to page Circles + Google 5. Add the e-mail from Facebook in a new circle (Hint, call the circle of “Facebook update”) 6. When you want to publish something on Facebook, simply add the circle.
1. How big do you think this will be? 2. Why do it on a Saturday? Wouldn't this cause more alarm on a Wednesday (or busy workday)? 3. Are you interested in this event at all? If so, what media outlets will you watch with regard to whether or not they cover this event? 4. Their simple demand seems unformed. An almost afterthought on https://occupywallst.org/ suggests it is to remove corporate personhood. Do you agree with this demand, or do you think it is the right "single simple demand"?
For a while now I have been wishing there was a local wine inventory locator. So, say, +Robin Garr from http://www.wineloverspage.com/ recommends a wine, I could look up where it is locally and then go buy it.
This new service from Google is going to make it really easy for companies to provide this kind of service. They only have to provide inventory and you suddenly have all the features of a flagship company like Amazon (recommendations, promotions, merchandising, etc...), a search company like Google (auto-complete, didyoumean, etc...) and a mobile app (local inventory lookup). To me, this could be kind of a game changer.
In a letter announcing its sponsorship withdrawal, Philips wrote that it was concerned the commission's work "may appear to support bi-partisan" instead of "non-partisan" politics. YWCA similarly wrote that it was dropping out because it is a "non-partisan" women's organization.
Doesn't sound like the Ron Paul crowd is that into Mittens. He's getting harshed on Twitter. He has almost zero chance of getting elected. Every move he makes is a embarrassing blunder. He's going to get thrashed in the debates.
I don't know enough about teachers unions to place blame there, but I do think education is a monopoly. To me this is the single biggest failure of the United States, education is massively fragmented between classes reinforcing class roles over generations.
-"I was alarmed to find that while testing a parental control program, I was easily able to navigate to a page containing pornographic images. Surely that should not happen?" - "You're right, that shouldn't be happening. Would you mind telling me which query you entered when you saw the inappropriate results? Thanks!" - "I simply entered Jenna Presley into the search field, waited for the results page and then clicked on images."
You were searching for a porn actress and you got pornographic results?!?!?! Ohnoes!!!!!!!!
"The FBI, if they thought they had a reason, could find out where you are and read your email, with relatively little oversight. Don't think they can? This is what happened to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, an active four star general and two women. Even after this incredible invasion of privacy, the FBI has determined that no crime was likely committed and charges are unlikely to be filed.
Want to know what a national security state looks like? Look around."
This is a fairly random collection of people on Google Plus that have nothing in common other than the fact that they may have interacted with my posts at one time or another. Circling it may improve your G+ experience. If you want to be in this circle of mine, all you have to do is engage (and not be a dick).
This is the social contract: that there is one and only one way. The very powers that make this good also make it evil. If Santorum were ever elected president, all of the arguments for the social contract would instantly look like a really bad idea while he's writing federally imposed laws banning gay marriage, requiring prayer in schools and putting MMJ patients in jail etc...
Voluntary association, where these laws could not be imposed upon you without your consent, is a structure that allows people to select from multiple options. This keeps the power wielded in check - pinned directly to popular participation. Here in the US, you have to participate or go to jail.
"Turkey suspended military ties with Israel, expelled top Israeli diplomats, pledged to support the Palestinians' statehood bid and vowed to send the Turkish navy to escort Gaza-bound aid ships in the future."